PDA

View Full Version : Venezuela or Iraq


Alonso
03-27-2006, 10:09 PM
Do you think Bush should have declared war on Iraq or Venezuela?

Tell me your thoughts...

DragoniteMistress
03-27-2006, 10:51 PM
Neither. Bush sucks.

Did I spam saying that? Just curious:oops: :crackup:

Matthew
03-29-2006, 06:04 AM
Neither. Bush sucks.

Did I spam saying that? Just curious:oops: :crackup:

Yes you did, actually. If you are going to say immature comments like that, than at least support it to make yourself look intelligent (No offense to you... I'm sure you are intelligent enough to debate).

Here is a question for you, why do you think that Bush "sucks"?

And for future reference, I wouldn't use that word in intelligent discussions... it doesn't help you any and just results in frustrating arguments.

Alonso
03-29-2006, 08:58 PM
Are we going to continue or is this going to be the last post that is problably gonna be put onto this thread.

Crystal Walrein
03-30-2006, 09:46 PM
I say he made the right choice by going for Iraq. Chavez is nothing compared to Saddam in terms of persecuting the minority or gobbling up funds for himself.

Nasty Plasty
03-30-2006, 09:49 PM
Yeah, Iraq was the better choice. They were the ones who crashed the twin towers. All we gotta do is catch Osama Bin Laden and execute all of al Queda by gun shot to the head and then we can call ourselves "The most bloodthirsty country in the whole-wide world!!!!"

Pika57
03-30-2006, 09:54 PM
Who says we should have gone to either.

Nothing wrong with Venezuela, and Iraq was fine before.

Crystal Walrein
03-31-2006, 11:34 AM
Yeah, Iraq was the better choice. They were the ones who crashed the twin towers. All we gotta do is catch Osama Bin Laden and execute all of al Queda by gun shot to the head and then we can call ourselves "The most bloodthirsty country in the whole-wide world!!!!"
Actually, none of the hijackers were from Iraq — most if not all of them were recruited from Saudi Arabia or Yemen.

PokemonElite2000
03-31-2006, 03:41 PM
Actually, none of the hijackers were from Iraq most if not all of them were recruited from Saudi Arabia or Yemen.
Yea, none from Iraq. 15 out of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. 2 from United Arab Emirates, 1 from Lebanon, and 1 from Egypt. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_Terrorist_Attack/Hijackers

Alonso
03-31-2006, 03:44 PM
Yeah, Iraq was the better choice. They were the ones who crashed the twin towers. All we gotta do is catch Osama Bin Laden and execute all of al Queda by gun shot to the head and then we can call ourselves "The most bloodthirsty country in the whole-wide world!!!!"
!!!!! I CANNOT BELIEVE THIS. You actually think the Iraqis hijacked the plane. How can you say that. That is completely untrue. So there are people who actually believe that. Ok look we went to Iraq and we had no intention of going to Iraq just to get back at the guys who attacked us. If there was no 9/11 attack on us we would have still gone to Iraq anyway. It was on Bush's Things-To-Do list way before he was even elected president in 2001.

And Osama isn't an Iraqi. He is from somewhere else in the Middle East. And he is not from Aghanistan. He just resided there because he was kicked out from his actual country.
The US probably already knows where he is, with all the satellites we have but if Bush catches Osama then the "Bring Our Troops Home" protests would grow, because we "supposedly" went to the Middle East to catch Osama. So that's why we probably why we don't have Osama.
EDIT: Osama is from Saudi Arabia and then he was thrown out.

PokemonElite2000
03-31-2006, 04:26 PM
!!!!! I CANNOT BELIEVE THIS. You actually think the Iraqis hijacked the plane. How can you say that. That is completely untrue. So there are people who actually believe that. Ok look we went to Iraq and we had no intention of going to Iraq just to get back at the guys who attacked us. If there was no 9/11 attack on us we would have still gone to Iraq anyway. It was on Bush's Things-To-Do list way before he was even elected president in 2001.

And Osama isn't an Iraqi. He is from somewhere else in the Middle East. And he is not from Aghanistan. He just resided there because he was kicked out from his actual country.
The US probably already knows where he is, with all the satellites we have but if Bush catches Osama then the "Bring Our Troops Home" protests would grow, because we "supposedly" went to the Middle East to catch Osama. So that's why we probably why we don't have Osama.

A poll back in 2003 found that a majority, over 50%, said at least one of the hijackers were from Iraq, which is wrong.

So it's a pretty common mistake. And see below:

The PIPA Knowledge Networks Poll conducted in October 2, 2003
I always found this poll to be very facinating. Basically to see what the misconceptions are. For example, link between Iraq and al-Queda, there is no evidence showing that (not an opinion, a fact, US government won't tell you we found evidence of that). Or if we found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (another obvious, we haven't found any, that's why it's big news, but still, some people get it wrong and say we did find it).

Evidence of Links Between Iraq and al-Qaeda
Is it your impression that the US has or has not found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization?
(This is the percent of people surveyed who watch the corresponding news media who said we did find clear evidence linking Saddam Hussein and al Queda, which is factually wrong)

Percent of wrong answer: There is clear evidence of link between Saddam Hussein and al Queda
Fox: 67%
CBS: 56%
NBC: 49%
CNN: 48%
ABC: 45%
Print media: 40%
PBS-NPR: 16%

Weapons of Mass Destruction
Since the war with Iraq ended, is it your impression that the US has or has not found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction?
(This is the percent of people surveyed who watch the corresponding news media who said we found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which is factually wrong)

Percent of wrong answer: we did find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
Fox: 33%
CBS: 23%
NBC: 20%
CNN: 20%
ABC: 19%
Print media: 17%
PBS-NPR: 11%

Source: http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03/IraqMedia_Oct03_rpt.pdf

Granted, that was back in 2003, but yea, you can see a lot of people can get things wrong. I'm sure after 3 years that more people got their facts right now, but there's still plenty of people that got their facts wrong.

Alonso
03-31-2006, 04:39 PM
A poll back in 2003 found that a majority, over 50%, said at least one of the hijackers were from Iraq, which is wrong.

So it's a pretty common mistake. And see below:

The PIPA Knowledge Networks Poll conducted in October 2, 2003
I always found this poll to be very facinating. Basically to see what the misconceptions are. For example, link between Iraq and al-Queda, there is no evidence showing that (not an opinion, a fact, US government won't tell you we found evidence of that). Or if we found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (another obvious, we haven't found any, that's why it's big news, but still, some people get it wrong and say we did find it).

Evidence of Links Between Iraq and al-Qaeda
Is it your impression that the US has or has not found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization?
(This is the percent of people surveyed who watch the corresponding news media who said we did find clear evidence linking Saddam Hussein and al Queda, which is factually wrong)

Percent of wrong answer: There is clear evidence of link between Saddam Hussein and al Queda
Fox: 67%
CBS: 56%
NBC: 49%
CNN: 48%
ABC: 45%
Print media: 40%
PBS-NPR: 16%

Weapons of Mass Destruction
Since the war with Iraq ended, is it your impression that the US has or has not found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction?
(This is the percent of people surveyed who watch the corresponding news media who said we found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which is factually wrong)

Percent of wrong answer: we did find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
Fox: 33%
CBS: 23%
NBC: 20%
CNN: 20%
ABC: 19%
Print media: 17%
PBS-NPR: 11%

Source: http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03..._Oct03_rpt.pdf

Granted, that was back in 2003, but yea, you can see a lot of people can get things wrong. I'm sure after 3 years that more people got their facts right now, but there's still plenty of people that got their facts wrong.
I know that Iraq and al-Qaeda have no ties. Tell that to Chao Breeder.

It's not that people have have their facts wrong (which some people do), it's just there are a lot of stubborn people out there who STILL listen to Bush and don't want to change their mind on this thing. Why do they have to be so stubborn. Bush lied and that's that. He is going to remain in Iraq for the remainder of his term and it will be up to a future president to pull them out. Well all I can say is that the US has changed way to much and their policies today are so bogus. I don't know why they changed and screwed up their reputation so much after all that happened since 1776. So who can we blame...I don't know.

Off Topic: Why are there people on the forum right now? Don't you guys have school or a job to go to. If your homesick or got it's a holiday then it's acceptable.